Central Information Commission
Ashok Kumar Ghosh vs Transport Department Delhi on 30 June, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/TDDEL/A/2024/103570
Ashok Kumar Ghosh .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Transport Department,
Enforcement Branch,
5/9, Under Hill Road,
Delhi - 110054 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 27.06.2025
Date of Decision : 30.06.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 08.11.2023
CPIO replied on : 29.11.2023
First appeal filed on : 13.12.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 23.01.2024
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 02.02.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 08.11.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:
"On 20-04-2023, a group of Personnel in white attire, exactly like traffic Police, later it was given to understand that they were from the Transport department of Government of NCR of and Delhi (Enforce Branch), arrived an towing/ Lifting the applicant's over aged but well Page 1 of 8 maintained and in perfect Condition, white small car/vehicle, model - UNO FIAT, registration No. DL. 3CJ 5355, parked outside the gate of the house; which the applicant presented to his wife for her use, on her awarding a Ph.D degree by the Indian statistical Institute (959), (959), Calcutta (West Bengal), there was no notice was issued by the transport department but by using their muscle power.
As the action on part of a transport department officials was not appreciate, the applicant cant had addressed a few letters to the transport department, Commissioner of transport department and the commissioner of police, however, barring an acknowledgement from the Hon'ble Transport Minister Shri kalash Gehlot, none sent any reply. The Copy of hon'ble minister's Letter is enclosed for perusal. In this regard, the applicant is furnishing details of the Letters endorsed to the different authorities to bring the fact to their notices:
Regarding lifting/towing over aged car
1. Letter dated 03-06-2023, addressed to Shri Vinod Dabas, Enforcement officer, Government of National Capital Region of Delhi, Transport Department (Enforcement branch), 5/9 under Hill Road, Delhi 110054. A Copy was forwarded to Shri Sanjay Arora, Commissioner of police, office of Police commissioner, Police Head Quarter, Jaising Road, New Delhi-110001.
2. Letter dated 23-09-2013, addressed. to the Commissioner, Transport Trans Department of Government of NCR of Delhi (Enforcement Branch), 5/9, under Hill Road, Civil Lines. Delhi-110054
3. Letter dated 03-10-2023, addressed. to the commissioner, Transport department of Government of NCR of Deli (Enforcement Branch), 5/9 under Hill Road civil lines, Delhi-110054.
i) Kindly provide information whether there was any instructions from the Transport Minister Hon'ble Shri Kailash Gehlot or from the Court in connection with impounding overaged vehicles parked outside the date of owner of the house and not playing on road (for some time) because of user's (hereto wife) critical illness, whom the vehicle was gifted on account of her awarded a PH.D degree in 'PSYCOLOGY' by 959 Calcutta.
ii) Kindly disclose whether the Hon'ble Transport Minister Shri Gehlot at any xxxxxxx time has ordered to stop the drive to confiscate overaged parked vehicle?Page 2 of 8
iii) kindly disclose whether Impounding Overaged Vehicle by the transport department of Delhi Government and Sent that for scraping without having any authority under Law is a criminal Act or not?
iv) Kindly disclose whether impounding of vehicle raises important question of Law, including that of the right of a person to protect and preserve tangible entities belonging to one's Parant's in order to ensure continuation of family values and heritage in the generation yet unborn?
v) Kindly disclose whether for the Vehicle registration no DL 3CJ5355 the owner had to approach the Hon'ble High court for either getting the vehicle released or arranging issuance of a stay order against its Scrapping?
vi) The applicant understand that it was a potent allegation of the transport department that overaged vehicle parked outside the gate occupying Public space, being towing away for scrapping. If that be the fact, how do you define Public place when personal car of his Wife was to be kept/Parked in front of his house? kindly disclose?
vii) Kindly disclose whether, or not rams constructed permanently by almost all the builders in Chittaranjan Park New Delhi to facilitate to and from movement of Vehicles in the STILT FLOOR by encroaching public Government Land is tantamount Public place?
viii) It had come to the notice of the applicant that one Mr. Rahul chawla of Patel Nagar, New Delhi owning a BMW car had arranged some relief from Hon'ble High court by filing a writ petition. However, the applicant being a pensioner from state Bank of India, drawing a very limited month-by pension, could not dare to go for Said writ and thus could not arrange any relief from the transport department. kindly disclose whether or not such discrimination violates the appropriate Provisions of the Constitution of India?
ix) Kindly disclose the present status of Vehicle registration No. DL CJ 5358, model uno Fiat, colour-white, impounded on 20-04-2023?"
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 29.11.2023 stating as under:
Page 3 of 8"The matter with respect of seizure/impounding of the vehicles as per the decision of Hon'ble NGT of 2014 restricting plying or parked vehicle attained the prescribed age of 10 years in case of diesel vehicles and 15. years in case of petrol/cng vehicles read with subsequent directions from. Central Air Quality Management (CAQM) the Central Government appointed for maintaining and supervising the air quality in Delhi to scrap such vehicles. Accordingly, the order was issued by the Commissioner Transport vide OM nó.
DC/OPS/TPT/2023/075735140/60875 dated 27/06/2023 involving therein for implementation of the directions of the Hon'ble NGT and CAQM to seize and impound the vehicles (here impound. may be read with general directions not with the provisions of 207 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, because the vehicle impounded under the said order are not liable for any challan even imposed by any respective Hon'ble Court). The vehicle was impounded under rule 10(iii) of RVSF rules 2021."
3. The PIO, Scrapping Cell vide letter dated 08.12.2023 provides point-wise reply/information to the Appellant, which states as under:
"1. Yes, Transport Department, GNCTD initiated action against end of life vehicles on the directions of CAQM, Hon'ble Supreme Court and Hon'ble NGT.
2. Doesn't pertain to Scrapping Cell may be provided by Enforcement Branch, however copy of RTI is already available with the said branch.
3. Copy of O.M attached wherein the Rules/Acts/orders/directions are mentioned under which the ELVs were impounded.
4. Information not, available.
5. Information not available.
6. Doesn't pertain to Scrapping Cell may be provided by Enforcement Branch, however copy of RTI is already available with the said branch.
7. Doesn't pertain to Scrapping Cell may be provided by Enforcement Branch, however copy of RTI is already available with the said branch.
8. Information not available.
9. Information not available."Page 4 of 8
4. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.12.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 23.01.2024, held as under:
"The PIO/EO(Enforcement Branch) and appellant are not present in the Appeal before Dy. Commissioner, Operations (First Appellate Authority) till 10:55 A.Μ.
The PIO/EO(Enforcement Branch) is hereby directed to provide the information to the appellant within 15 days from the issue of this order with copy to the undersigned."
5. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not Present.
Respondent: Shri Pushpraj, SO (Scrapping), Nodal Officer PIO, Shri Ashok Kumar Kaushik, Enforcement Officer and Shri Vikrant Shokeen, Constable present in person.
6. Latest written submissions of the Respondent are taken on record and the same is reproduced hereinbelow:
"The appellant filed an undated lengthy RTI application (received at Transport Department (GNCTD) on 10.11.2023) exceeding 500 words highlighting his personal grievances on car number DL3CJ5355 of his wife being impounded in accordance under rule10(iii) of RVSF rules 2012. Kind attention is drawn towards rule 3 of RTI Rules 2012 notified through Gazetteer Notification dated 31.07.2012 which reads as under:
An application under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Act shall be accompanied by a fee of rupees ten and shall ordinarily not contain more than five hundred words, excluding annexures, containing address of the Central Public Information Officer and that of the applicant:
Provided that no application shall be rejected only on the ground that it contains more than five hundred words.Page 5 of 8
Accordingly, RTI application was responded through reply dated 29.11.2023. The appellant filed his First Appeal dated 13.12.2023 which was decided vide an order dated 23.01.2024. Order by First Appellate Authority was complied vide reply dated 30.01.2024.
Point-numbers(1)and(2) No such information existson record of Transport Department (GNCTD) Point-numbers(3)to(8) ♡ Information sought does not come under purview of section 2(f) of RTI Act. PIO can provide information only which exists on record, PIO is not supposed to interpret/clarify/comment/give personal opinion ete to provide information.
Point-number(9) The appellant was informed vide letters dated 20.04.2023and31.05.2024(copies enclosed).
Furthermore, it is humbly submitted that RTI Act cannot be used as some Grievance-Redressal- Mechanism. Reference is invited to CIC-verdict dated 14.12.2011(CIC/SS/A/2011/001500) in the matter "Smt. Guddan Khatoon versus Delhi Police (South District)" wherein it was observed as under:
"The appellant seems to have a grievance against the local police. There is no provision in the RTI Act to redress the grievance of the appellant. The appellant may, if she so desires, file a petition before the competent authority for redressal of her grievance."
Reference is further invited to CIC-decision dated 29.01.203 in the matter "H.K.Bansal vs CPIO &GM (OP), MTNL"
(CIC/LS/A/2011/000982/BS/1786), where in the Commission observed as follows:
"The RTI Act is not the proper law for redressal of grievances/disputes and there are other appropriate forum(s) for resolving such matters."
I or further kind reference of your honour, under-mentioned documents are also being enclosed with these written submissions:
Page 6 of 8Order dated: 28.03.2023 by Transport Department (GNCTD) Gazette of India dated 16.07.2021 List of 17 Vintage cars in Delhi"
7. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that complete point-wise reply/information, as per the documents available on their record has been provided to the Appellant wherein, they have also provided copy of relevant order of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and Hon'ble NGT.
Decision:
8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the Respondent and perusal of the records, observes that the Appellant in his second appeal is aggrieved that complete and correct information has not been provided to him by the Respondent. On the other hand, the Respondent contended that point-wise reply/information, as per the documents available on their record has been provided to the Appellant.
9. The Commission observes that the Respondent Scrapping Cell had provided point-wise reply to the Appellant wherein they have mentioned 'information not available' in response to point Nos. 4, 5, 8 and 9 of the RTI application and on point Nos. 2, 6 and 7 of the RTI application, the Respondent stated that the information sought does not pertains to Scrapping Cell and may be obtained by Enforcement Branch. The Respondent neither transferred the RTI application of the Appellant on said points under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act nor sought assistance under Section 5(4) of the RTI Act from the concerned PIO. Further, merely stating information not available does not suffice the purpose of the RTI Act.
10. The Respondent, Scrapping Cell, is directed to re-examine the RTI application dated 08.11.2023 of the Appellant and give revised point- wise reply/information to the Appellant.Page 7 of 8
11. Since, much time has now elapsed, the Respondent is directed to take assistance under Section 5(4) of the RTI Act from the concerned PIO w.r.t the information sought on point Nos. 2, 6 and 7 of the RTI application and provide information to the Appellant, free of cost, within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, through speed post, failing which to show-cause within this period as to why maximum penalty should not be imposed under the RTI Act.
12. The FAA is directed to ensure compliance of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA Transport Department, GNCTD, 5/9, Under Hill Road, Delhi - 110054 Page 8 of 8 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)